Question

Individual Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), Safe Harbor Agreements (group HCP’s) and Natural Communities Conservation Plans (regional NCCPs) have created a great deal of controversy. Why? Do you think HCP’s in general are a good or bad idea? Why? Consider that for candidate species, listing is sometimes delayed if state and local agencies demonstrate that adaptive management practices are in place to improve the chances of survival and recovery for species. If HCP’s, Safe Harbor Agreements and NCCPs are going to persist whether you like them or not, how can they be strengthened to best accomplish the goal of preserving biodiversity?

Answer 1

Individual Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), Safe Harbor Agreements (group HCP’s) and Natural Communities Conservation Plans (regional NCCPs) have created a great deal of controversy because of the fast urbanization in landscapes that are rich with rare species and sensitive habitats will lead to the making megacities that is not good for people or nature. Habitat Conservation Plans is a good idea because they offer the conservation of key habitat areas of many organisms along with the they take care of endangered species in various locations.

They be strengthened to best accomplish the goal of preserving biodiversity in the following way:

a. The plans made by them are enough for providing effective conservation.

b. By providing and supporting conservation planning.

c. Usage of best probable biological data and in making and implementing the plan.

d. These plans should meet the requirement of every stakeholders.

e. Plans should aids recovery of imperiled species.

f. There should be multiple representatives of different persons like Conservationists, developers, farmers at the discussions of the plans.